Proposed practice parameters for the performance of radiofrequency echographic multispectrometry (REMS) evaluations.

IF 2.8 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Kimberly Zambito, Yevgeniya Kushchayeva, Andrew Bush, Paola Pisani, Sergiy Kushchayeva, Mary Peters, Nick Birch
{"title":"Proposed practice parameters for the performance of radiofrequency echographic multispectrometry (REMS) evaluations.","authors":"Kimberly Zambito, Yevgeniya Kushchayeva, Andrew Bush, Paola Pisani, Sergiy Kushchayeva, Mary Peters, Nick Birch","doi":"10.1302/2633-1462.63.BJO-2024-0107.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Assessment of bone health is a multifaceted clinical process, incorporating biochemical and diagnostic tests that should be accurate and reproducible. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the reference standard for evaluation of bone mineral density, but has known limitations. Alternatives include quantitative CT (q-CT), MRI, and peripheral quantitative ultrasound (QUS). Radiofrequency echographic multispectrometry (REMS) is a new generation of ultrasound technology used for the assessment of bone mineral density (BMD) at axial sites that is as accurate as quality-assured DXA scans. It also provides an assessment of the quality of bone architecture. This will be of direct value and significance to orthopaedic surgeons when planning surgical procedures, including fracture fixation and surgery of the hip and spine, since BMD alone is a poor predictor of fracture risk.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The various other fixed-site technologies such as high-resolution peripheral q-CT (HR-pQCT) and MRI offer no further significant prognostic advantages in terms of assessing bone structure and BMD to predict fracture risk. QUS was the only widely adopted non-fixed imaging option for bone health assessment, but it is not considered adequately accurate to provide a quantitative assessment of BMD or provide a prediction of fracture risk. In contrast, REMS has a robust evidence base that demonstrates its equivalence to DXA in determining BMD at axial sites. Fracture prediction using REMS, combining the output of fragility information and BMD, has been established as more accurate than when using BMD alone.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The practice parameters described in this protocol provide a framework for clinicians who provide REMS services that will, to the greatest possible extent, ensure the most accurate assessment possible from this diagnostic technology.</p>","PeriodicalId":34103,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Open","volume":"6 3","pages":"291-297"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11884906/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.63.BJO-2024-0107.R1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Assessment of bone health is a multifaceted clinical process, incorporating biochemical and diagnostic tests that should be accurate and reproducible. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the reference standard for evaluation of bone mineral density, but has known limitations. Alternatives include quantitative CT (q-CT), MRI, and peripheral quantitative ultrasound (QUS). Radiofrequency echographic multispectrometry (REMS) is a new generation of ultrasound technology used for the assessment of bone mineral density (BMD) at axial sites that is as accurate as quality-assured DXA scans. It also provides an assessment of the quality of bone architecture. This will be of direct value and significance to orthopaedic surgeons when planning surgical procedures, including fracture fixation and surgery of the hip and spine, since BMD alone is a poor predictor of fracture risk.

Methods: The various other fixed-site technologies such as high-resolution peripheral q-CT (HR-pQCT) and MRI offer no further significant prognostic advantages in terms of assessing bone structure and BMD to predict fracture risk. QUS was the only widely adopted non-fixed imaging option for bone health assessment, but it is not considered adequately accurate to provide a quantitative assessment of BMD or provide a prediction of fracture risk. In contrast, REMS has a robust evidence base that demonstrates its equivalence to DXA in determining BMD at axial sites. Fracture prediction using REMS, combining the output of fragility information and BMD, has been established as more accurate than when using BMD alone.

Conclusion: The practice parameters described in this protocol provide a framework for clinicians who provide REMS services that will, to the greatest possible extent, ensure the most accurate assessment possible from this diagnostic technology.

提出了射频超声多光谱(REMS)评价性能的实践参数。
目的:骨健康评估是一个多方面的临床过程,包括生化和诊断测试,应该是准确和可重复的。双能x线吸收仪(DXA)是评估骨矿物质密度的参考标准,但已知存在局限性。替代方案包括定量CT (q-CT)、MRI和外周定量超声(QUS)。射频超声多光谱(REMS)是新一代超声技术,用于评估轴向部位的骨矿物质密度(BMD),其准确性与有质量保证的DXA扫描一样。它还提供了骨结构质量的评估。这将对骨科医生在计划外科手术时具有直接价值和意义,包括骨折固定和髋关节和脊柱手术,因为单独的骨密度不能很好地预测骨折风险。方法:其他各种固定位点技术,如高分辨率外周q-CT (HR-pQCT)和MRI,在评估骨结构和BMD以预测骨折风险方面没有进一步的显著预后优势。QUS是唯一被广泛采用的用于骨骼健康评估的非固定成像选择,但它被认为不足以准确地提供骨密度的定量评估或提供骨折风险的预测。相比之下,REMS具有强大的证据基础,证明其在确定轴向部位的骨密度方面与DXA等效。结合脆性信息和骨密度输出,利用REMS进行裂缝预测比单独使用骨密度预测更准确。结论:本协议中描述的实践参数为提供REMS服务的临床医生提供了一个框架,该框架将在最大程度上确保从该诊断技术中获得最准确的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Bone & Joint Open
Bone & Joint Open ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信